Supressing Group detail data

[antiskeptic]

I am creating a report in Crystal 9, and working with data from a stored procedure out of SQL Server.
My report consists of 4-5 groups, and details within those groups. However...there are several groups that do no match the criteria that I want to see. So I have created a few "rules" formulas that will determine if they appear on the final report out put or not.
In the section expert, I know how to supress a section based on a formula being true or false. However I do not know how to make the whole section, including detail section, supress... based on true / false formulas in the group header / footer.

Unfortunately, these formulas cannot be evaluated on the detail level...it must be on the header/footer. So that the whole group stay or go, depending on those formulas.
Anybody have any clues on this? Or have I thouroughly confused you. *ha*
Thanks in advance for any help you can provide.

Sincerely,
Antiskeptic

 

[GJParker]

Instead of trying to suppress the individual sections filter them out of the report by adding a group selection formula. Report -> Selection Formulas -> Group.

Place your rules here to hide the groups form the report.

HTH

Gary Parker
MIS Data Analyst
Manchester, England

 

[antiskeptic]

I tried this, but it gives me an error. I have to use a statement based on five different formula outcomes. If any of the five formulas are true or "X" then I don't want to see the group or details.


{@2MIN<30 With No or Wrong 30AD} = 'X'
or
{@30ADWrongStartTime} = 'X'
or
{@Call<2HoursWithNo2Min} = 'X'
or
{@CALL>2 and Wrong30AD} = 'X'
or
{@Call>2Hours With No 30AD} = 'X'


The error I get when trying to use this in the Record Selection>Group is -- "This formula cannot be used because it must be evaluated later."

I did go back in and put the statement in the section expert for the respective groups and detail sections. And it looks as though that will work after all.
Thank you for the tip. You can be sure I will remember it for future reference. But it doesn't seem to want to work for this one.

Thank you,
Antiskeptic